The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1887-06-14
The DEBATE RESUAED.
THE HOUSE OF COMMONs TAKES
UP THE
Fifth Clause Of the Coercion Bill
Henderson, the Alsatlan League
Tried for Treason.

LONDON, June 13.-The House o
Commons this evenir z resumed debst,
on the coercion bill, taking up tn,
fifth clause, which deals with the pro
claiming Cf the districts. Henri,
Fowler, Liberal, proposed, as al
amendment, that proclamations b1
made by order CT the Privy Councl
instead OF by the Vlceroy. He urged
that change of such Importance al
the .proclsiming of q district should be
made by the imperial ct the Irish
executive.
Mr.. Balfour, Chief Secretary for Ire.
land, declined 10 accept the amend
ment He reminded the House that
the government collectively were re-
sponsibIe for every act Of the Irish
executive.
Messra. Hesley, Mcneil, Clancy and
Dillon, Nationalist, successfully sup.
ported the amendment. Mr.. Glad
stone suggested that the members
should not spend any more of the
ehort time at their commsnd in futile
discussions, l. would be better, he
said, to employ the remaining time in
discussing weightier points. Mr..
Sml b said he WAS anxious to allow
sufficient time for the discussion of
substantial questions, and he hoped
the opposition would assist the gov.
eminent in this direction. Mr.. Fow-
Ter offered to wit draw his amend.
ment. Mr.. Dillon protested. He de-
clined to take advice from the govern
ment as TO what amendments should
be discussed in the miserable period
left to the Parnellites to contest tbs
measure.
M. Morley said he was sure Mr..
Gladstone had not meant 10 suggest
that the opposition asset in Limiting
the debate in accordance with the
government ideas. The opinions of
the Psrnellites upon the relative i'm
portance of amendments deserved
more attention than the opinions OF
English members.
The amendment was put to q divi-
sion and rejecied-235 to 1877. ,sas
MIR. Doherty moved An amer dment
that proclsmations be issued only on
the report OF a judge of the High Court
after local inquiry.
MIR. Holmss, the Irish Attorney
General, opposed the amendment on
the ground that it was not adv sable
to remove any responsib lily from the
executive. A local inquiry, he sad,
would be valulesr, because the Judge
would have no power to take evidence
OH oath.
Mr.. Clancy said that tie govern.
ment would have been more candid if |
they had given as TIE reason for their
opposi ion to the amendment their
desire to retain for political purposes
The power OF proc aiming district.
The amendment was rejected by
vote of 202 to 1875.
Mr.. Shaw Lefevre, moved an amend
ment limiting the authority of the
Viceroy in pr0claiming to districts
where it mignt be- necessary for the
of crime and outrage. He
appealed to the government to assent
70 the alteration, which he eaid would
brine the cla1se in accord with the
.ct OF 1882
Sir R. E. Webster, Attorney Gen
,ral, said that it was refrt shing to
lear M. S5aw.Lefevre defending the
'ct OF 1882. The governm ent, he add
~, could not accept the precept. The
'bJect OF the bill being to punish the
uthors az we'll as to prevent the com.
Mission of crime, the amendment
would hamper tue operation OF the
MEASURE.
Mr.. Morley said he had never heard
more ludicrous reason given for the
mission of an important limitali
showed that the real object OF tbs
III was not the prevention of crime,
ut the suppression of political comb-
atoms. [Oheero
Mr.. BIadlaHgh suggested that to
leet tn views of the government the
ords "and punishment" be added to
10 amendment after the word "pre-
ention."
Mr.. Balfour announced that the
overnment accepted the amendment
ith Mr.. Bradlaugh's modification.
Jhaere I